PhalloBoards - An Online Community to Discuss Penile Girth Enhancement

I\'ve found a source for generic Radiesse. It costs about $150 per ml. If we could find a Dr who would inject it and test it under a scope to check it\'s quality, then we could do a group bulk buy. I\'m sure 10 cc would easily give a 0.5\" gain. I\'m sure it must be legal do inject generic fillers in Mexico. I wonder if Dr C would do it.

pontest wrote: how much would it cost for me to go from
7.5 inch lengh and
5 inch girth
to a 6 inch girth using Radiesse?
I guess I\'m gonna be the first guinea pig for this procedure next year..... even if it\'s more expensive

Thanks

Depends on the clinic. Why don\'t you call and get this forum a quote?

how much would it cost for me to go from
7.5 inch lengh and
5 inch girth
to a 6 inch girth using Radiesse?
I guess I\'m gonna be the first guinea pig for this procedure next year..... even if it\'s more expensive

Thanks

Hi Guys, Hope all is well with you.I am getting more and more desperate and wants take the plunge as it has been more than two years since I started following this forum.I know I want to go ahead with one of the temporary options that is Radiesse and Macrolane.Macrolane is the more attractive option as the price is lower than Dr G and there are loads of drs around UK and western europe.what is holding me back is in the link belowhttp://www.ukmedix.com/news/surgery/penis-enlargement/penis_enlargement_problems_lead_to_impotence_and_pain6154.cfmsecondly, there arent many positive accounts relating to this procedure. If it was a simple and successful treatment many drs would pick this up and make loads of money as all they would need is to learn the injection technique. There are only few doctors offering this and many are quitting this method such as Dr Viel in London and a dr in sweden while other urologist arent even offering this method such as Dr Ralph in London. So my question to you guys is: which of the filler Radiesse and Macrolane would go for if you could only chose among these?I am not expecting to get 6\" girth but just around 5\"

pontest wrote: right... bua a granuloma is really the end of the world?
if not, I think it\'s worth the risk

if it were PMMA, then maybe we\'d have to remove it to treat the granuloma
but Radiesse is temporary anyway

thoughts?

The only reason I\'m not sold on Radiesse is that it seems if you have a granuloma it isn\'t simply solved by waiting for it to dissolve. I posted about this last week and you responded!

If a granuloma isn\'t painful and doesn\'t damage the surrounding tissue then to my mind it isn\'t the end of the word, as long as it isn\'t too big. But if that is the case then I think PMMA would be a better option anyway.

Radiesse would be perfect if it wasn\'t so expensive and granulomas would go if it just dissolved. But as it is, I think it would cost around $3000 per year for a decent gain and the article I posted suggests that complications persist long term, as do patient reports on sites like Realself. I\'m not really prepared to pay $3000 a year unless the risks seem significantly less than with PMMA.

I\'m personally am a bit skeptical that one would get around 1/2\" going to Dr G. I think for most people more product would have to be injected. Hence I think it would cost around $3000 for a 1/2\" gain.
If a couple more guys went to Dr G, paid $1800 and got 1/2\" gain I\'d be very interested. But as it stands we have one member and we\'ve seen from PMMA just how varied results can be. I think Dr G injects 3ml, and mixes with 3ml of anesthetic fluid. I just find it difficult to believe we\'d see consistent results with such a small amount.

right... bua a granuloma is really the end of the world?
if not, I think it\'s worth the risk

if it were PMMA, then maybe we\'d have to remove it to treat the granuloma
but Radiesse is temporary anyway

thoughts?

pontest wrote: hoddle, the formation of granuloma is only an aesthethic problem or is it painful as well?

thank you

That\'s what I\'ve been trying to find out, but it\'s hard to tell.

The key reason I\'m 100% against silicone and think the idea is pure insanity is because silicone is known to cause a type of granuloma that attacks the surrounding tissue and even breaks it down. If you look at how raw bluemale looks, this can\'t be just because of the bandage, but because of how much more aggressive the immune reaction is to silicone than PMMA. If you look at the fist photo in this link you can see that the silicone is destroying the actual penis tissue and hole is appearing in the skin. These types of granulomas are obviously not only painful, but one has no choice but to try and have it removed.


penisdoctor.com/photo5c.htm

I\'d imagine Radiesse granulomas are the same as PMMA though.

yao wrote: Hi Hoddle, What would you say is the main difference between macrolane and radiesse?I spoke with the dr at nice earlier this year and he charges only 1200' and is much closer to us in London. Thanks

The mechanisms are totally different. Radiesse is very similar to PMMA, only the microspheres dissolve over time. Basically a foreign body reaction occurs and the collagen from this creates the volume. Macrolane is a HA, so the volume comes from the product itself. So if you inject 10ml of Radiesse, only 3ml of this is Radiesse, the rest is a carrier which get quickly absorbed and replaced by collagen. If you inject 10ml and Macrolane, then that\'s it, nothing happens it just stays there until it absorbs 1-2 years later.

Hi Hoddle, What would you say is the main difference between macrolane and radiesse?I spoke with the dr at nice earlier this year and he charges only 1200' and is much closer to us in London. Thanks

www.realself.com/question/sculptra-penis-girth

in the link above, you will find a positive experience with radiesse in the penis from a guy in turkey.Might be of interest for some.

pontest wrote: Hoddle, do we have statistics about the risks of developing granulomas using Radiesse?
Maybe it\'s worth the risk...
And btw, these HA products are permanent?

Thanks

Recent study says 2.6%.

www.healio.com/dermatology/aesthetic-cos...-tissue-fillers-rare



But this is in the face and not the same as injecting into the penis. I doubt we\'d be able to find anything that can tell us how Radiesse does when injected in larger volumes. I doubt even the HIV community would offer much of an indication as it\'s probably too expensive for lipoatrophy treatments.

Hoddle, do we have statistics about the risks of developing granulomas using Radiesse?
Maybe it\'s worth the risk...
And btw, these HA products are permanent?

Thanks

interested1 wrote: @hoddle Why do you think the nodules or granulomas won\'t go away as the material is broken down? Also, my thoughts on a permanent solution is this, a temporary solution at least gives someone time to try the procedure and it allows for a less stressful experience. Also, I hope that in time more information will come out concerning pmma. Lastly, I have to say that I\'m not completely sold on omma as the ideal permanent filler. Perhaps there isn\'t one but maybe in time one will come out that is very long lasting and yet more easily removed. The HA products have this advantage(if they find a way to extend the life of the product then it would be very ideal). Does anyone know the granuloma or just complication rate for radiesse? The complication rate for Brazilian pmma is not really known, so its hard to compare.

I have no idea why they won\'t go away after material is broken down. I assumed they would, but the article suggests they don\'t.

Radiesse has a slightly higher complication rate compared to PMMA from what I remember. On the old board there is a study that compares all fillers, but I can\'t be bothered to try and find it now.

Like you, I\'m not sold on a permanent filler, but there is no point getting a temporary one that has permanent complications. My big fear with PMMA is having to have surgery to correct problems and thus when they suggest surgery to correct Radiesse problems, it obviously puts me off.

So I\'m back to looking at the HA products. The trouble is I\'ve never come across anyone who has been happy with their result. However, they seem to inject large quantities and I think that could be part of the problem. I wonder if a smaller amount was injected and then a derma roller used post procedure, whether the result would be better.

We have 2 members, DangerRoss and Mikehok, who had HA and neither were thrilled. However they both had 50cc injected. With Radiesse one would hope for a 0.5\" gain (using Dr G\'s protocol). I think that could be achieved with 20cc of HA. Conner has just self injected that amount, so it would be interesting to see what he gained.

@hoddle
Why do you think the nodules or granulomas won\'t go away as the material is broken down?

Also, my thoughts on a permanent solution is this, a temporary solution at least gives someone time to try the procedure and it allows for a less stressful experience. Also, I hope that in time more information will come out concerning pmma. Lastly, I have to say that I\'m not completely sold on omma as the ideal permanent filler. Perhaps there isn\'t one but maybe in time one will come out that is very long lasting and yet more easily removed. The HA products have this advantage(if they find a way to extend the life of the product then it would be very ideal).

Does anyone know the granuloma or just complication rate for radiesse? The complication rate for Brazilian pmma is not really known, so its hard to compare.

This article was posted elsewhere in the forum and seems to be confirming my concern that the main problems we fear with PMMA are equally as permanent with Radiesse. I can\'t really see the point of opting for Radiesse if granuloma lumps are equally as hard to deal with. Obviously they don\'t simply disappear when the rest of the material dissolves. This is really disappointing to me as I was pretty much sold on this method.

archderm.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1149920